| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Saturday 10 July 2004 12:36, Andrew Cowie wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 18:37 +0000, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
| 6 |
> > become part of the solution ... for |
| 7 |
> > packages that you find to be stable. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> So seriously: what is an enthusiast to do? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
The Question ^^^ |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> The best I can come up with is a contribution system similar to voting: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> An infrastructure level change tied to Portage in which if someone |
| 16 |
> builds something that is ~arch and finds that it is stable, then an |
| 17 |
> email (gpg signed, perhaps, to avoid the usual spam issues?) gets fired |
| 18 |
> off (on command, after user has had time to consider things) to some |
| 19 |
> aggregator which keeps stats on ebuild versions. That way, a somewhat |
| 20 |
> objective sense of progress and stability can be built up on a per |
| 21 |
> ebuild (or perhaps, per version) basis. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
The Answer ^^^ |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
All you need to do now is to right up a GLEP that covers how it all works, |
| 26 |
bring it back for discussion to ensure that developers are happy to follow |
| 27 |
the detailed proposal and then provide some patches. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Regards, |
| 30 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 31 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 32 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
iQCVAwUBQO9tHloikN4/5jfsAQIBawQAj35Klb2LKPPhDQXHNlkF4QcF+g7n6Yi/ |
| 35 |
P7IFjcA6w3gDFVZqqH4yOKSWnCT2g0+Cx+bgbc4X8ot3Qcwx6ufo7DcmaE8DPDUz |
| 36 |
i2J7Pop4vWlfWRnGGjbNe7Pc/WGflnYC57CydU0b7O7X9rptw+Icl6Q/A8uJDSw3 |
| 37 |
uGJErJkyx2s= |
| 38 |
=6RpO |
| 39 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives